vs. Boston College ATL Chart

Screenshot_20211111-212547.png
 
Things I would like to see this week and for the rest of the Season:

No more snaps for #5 at WR, instead give those snaps to #26 that looked to have a high ceiling vs Pitt and then disappeared, maybe he's injured, Fans can never tell with these new Injury reporting rules.

On maybe 50% of the snaps or more play #9 at TE and use him in a H-Back-hybrid TE Role(Think Shannon Sharpe for the Elway led Broncos #9 is similar size 6-2 230), he is the guy that scored on a 2pt conversion a few weeks ago.

We need more offensive punch from our TE spot, and #9 seems to be sturdy and more reliable catching the ball, maybe he can give us some easy throws (improve completion pctg) and he can outrun LBers in coverage, it makes no sense to have a buncha guys on the TE depth chart that produce very little, on every level of FB, the TE is called the QB's best friend, let's make that a reality for our Offense also.

#76 has been ATL for a few Games, at 3-6 and reeling on the OLine maybe we give him a couple of Series to see what we have, maybe we also give #72 & #60 chances to redeem themselves (see I believe in 2nd chances).

In general, the time has come for us to start evaluating younger players in Game Action, especially along the LoS.
 
We may see Jamious Griffin some. Apparently they redshirted him this year but he can play in a couple more games
 
BainbridgeJacket said:
Does anyone know if we're still the youngest team in P5?
Click to expand...
I think Georgia Tech has 14 juniors and 12 seniors on the 2021 roster. (Do not know how many or who are RSJuniors or RS Seniors)

Bill C (all hail) puts out post-game win expectancy numbers that are answering the exact root of your question. It basically means given the box scores and what he refers to as the ""https://www.footballstudyhall.com/2014/1/24/5337968/college-football-five-factors">5 Factors", here’s how often our team could have expected to win a given game.

Here’s the 2021 season:

NIU – 63.4%
KSU – 100%
Clemson – 21.7%
UNC – 87.8%
Pitt – 0.8%
Duke – 67.6%
UVA – 18.7%
VPISU – 13.7%
Miami – 1%

I’m sure one of our intrepid posters will harp on these numbers, but it’s not a good look for our HC.

FWIW the last time GT transitioned from the option
Bill Curry taking over from Pepper Rodgers:

1980: 1-9-1 (tie was #1 ND, 5 years after Rudy was offsides, which unfortunately pushed the dwags into the #1 slot)
1981: 1-10 (win was #2 Bama)
1982: 6-5
1983: 3-8 (first year playing a predominantly ACC schedule)
1984: 6-4-1
1985: 9-2-1
1986 5-5-1
 
Last edited:
GTFLETCH said:
I think Georgia Tech has 14 juniors and 12 seniors on the 2021 roster. (Do not know how many or who are RSJuniors or RS Seniors)

Bill C (all hail) puts out post-game win expectancy numbers that are answering the exact root of your question. It basically means given the box scores and what he refers to as the ""https://www.footballstudyhall.com/2014/1/24/5337968/college-football-five-factors">5 Factors", here’s how often our team could have expected to win a given game.

Here’s the 2021 season:

NIU – 63.4%
KSU – 100%
Clemson – 21.7%
UNC – 87.8%
Pitt – 0.8%
Duke – 67.6%
UVA – 18.7%
VPISU – 13.7%
Miami – 1%

I’m sure one of our intrepid posters will harp on these numbers, but it’s not a good look for our HC.

FWIW the last time GT transitioned from the option
Bill Curry taking over from Pepper Rodgers:

1980: 1-9-1 (tie was #1 ND, 5 years after Rudy was offsides, which unfortunately pushed the dwags into the #1 slot)
1981: 1-10 (win was #2 Bama)
1982: 6-5
1983: 3-8 (first year playing a predominantly ACC schedule)
1984: 6-4-1
1985: 9-2-1
1986 5-5-1
Click to expand...
That’s a neat assessment in part 1. Thanks for sharing. 0.8%. Wow. It sure felt like it.

For part 2, the FWIW primer is generous at best. There is zero utility in comparing then to now for any facet of CFB except the field dimensions and number of players.
 
MeatWrench said:
That’s a neat assessment in part 1. Thanks for sharing. 0.8%. Wow. It sure felt like it.

For part 2, the FWIW primer is generous at best. There is zero utility in comparing then to now for any facet of CFB except the field dimensions and number of players.
Click to expand...

That 1 percent for Miami though, in a game we lost by 3 points. Yikes
 
When I look at the above the line groups it is clear our best position, by far, is running back. It is a shame we have not had the imagination to use two and even three back sets. I am not talking about a TO set. Counters with both Gibbs and Mason or Smith, getting Griffin in the game, pistol sets where Gibbs gets a running start forward with at least one back beside Sims, maybe even two, with lead blockers, lots of motion with throws to get the the ball in space, toss sweeps with the numbers blocking in our favor, etc.

This could have helped the OL with some lead blockers and misdirection. It plays to our strength. Just my armchair QBing for today.
 
77GTFan said:
When I look at the above the line groups it is clear our best position, by far, is running back. It is a shame we have not had the imagination to use two and even three back sets. I am not talking about a TO set. Counters with both Gibbs and Mason or Smith, getting Griffin in the game, pistol sets where Gibbs gets a running start forward with at least one back beside Sims, maybe even two, with lead blockers, lots of motion with throws to get the the ball in space, toss sweeps with the numbers blocking in our favor, etc.

This could have helped the OL with some lead blockers and misdirection. It plays to our strength. Just my armchair QBing for today.
Click to expand...
We do use two back sets. Started the VT game using two back set.

I wouldn't mind if we had a Mike Cox style fullback on the team so we could run some i-back plays every so often, run or play action.
 
77GTFan said:
When I look at the above the line groups it is clear our best position, by far, is running back. It is a shame we have not had the imagination to use two and even three back sets. I am not talking about a TO set. Counters with both Gibbs and Mason or Smith, getting Griffin in the game, pistol sets where Gibbs gets a running start forward with at least one back beside Sims, maybe even two, with lead blockers, lots of motion with throws to get the the ball in space, toss sweeps with the numbers blocking in our favor, etc.

This could have helped the OL with some lead blockers and misdirection. It plays to our strength. Just my armchair QBing for today.
Click to expand...
Someone mentioned earlier (not sure if this thread or another) that Griffin was being reassured this year.
 
PressManCoverage said:
Things I would like to see this week and for the rest of the Season:

No more snaps for #5 at WR, instead give those snaps to #26 that looked to have a high ceiling vs Pitt and then disappeared, maybe he's injured, Fans can never tell with these new Injury reporting rules.

On maybe 50% of the snaps or more play #9 at TE and use him in a H-Back-hybrid TE Role(Think Shannon Sharpe for the Elway led Broncos #9 is similar size 6-2 230), he is the guy that scored on a 2pt conversion a few weeks ago.

We need more offensive punch from our TE spot, and #9 seems to be sturdy and more reliable catching the ball, maybe he can give us some easy throws (improve completion pctg) and he can outrun LBers in coverage, it makes no sense to have a buncha guys on the TE depth chart that produce very little, on every level of FB, the TE is called the QB's best friend, let's make that a reality for our Offense also.

#76 has been ATL for a few Games, at 3-6 and reeling on the OLine maybe we give him a couple of Series to see what we have, maybe we also give #72 & #60 chances to redeem themselves (see I believe in 2nd chances).

In general, the time has come for us to start evaluating younger players in Game Action, especially along the LoS.
Click to expand...
Pretty much surrendering the remaining games with this approach. Kinda hard to argue against though. Good, bad, ugly this is the time of year teams start seeing younger guys step up more anyway. Freshman are pretty much sophomores at this point. I still say put the best guys available on the field to play at any given moment but the younger guys that can contribute should be more visible with mroe pt at this point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top